More MVP Talk

--Sportscenter featured an "evening version" of First and 10 today, pitting Rob Parker and Skip Bayless against one another in a debate to decide who should win the NBA MVP. Parker opted for Chris Paul while Bayless stuck with the easy choice, Kevin Garnett. I really don't have a problem with either of those picks, if not for the fact that Kobe Bryant is having a 'Michael Who?' year (much like his 2006 season, where he proved that no one in the world could stop him should he choose to play one-on-five). But, the two esteemed panelists decided that Kobe Bryant and his fifteen technicals were too immature to win the MVP.

First off, these two gentlemen discussed Bryant as if he had already been suspended a game for his technicals. You see, the NBA has a rule that 16 regular season technical fouls result in one regular season game suspension. But, Kobe has fifteen, and these two men spoke as if he had already received his sixteenth. To say that Kobe is a smart player would be an understatement. I have complete faith in him that he will hold his tongue over the next couple of weeks and avoid his sixteenth technical. What happens if Kobe does avoid the suspension? Unfortunately, these two geniuses neglected to cover that issue. Ah, ESPN.

As far as the rest of the debate played out, how about we take a look-see at the arguments for each writer's respective candidate. Rob Parker selected Chris Paul; his reasoning, aside from some admittedly monster stats, "how many people expected the Hornets to be in first place in the West, especially at this time of year. The fact that they are in first gives them the nod."

Hmm, I am not sure if Parker is aware of this, but no one out West has led the conference for more days after the all-star break than the Los Angeles Lakers. Given the fact that this includes a few games without Pao Gasol and no games with Andrew Bynum, should this not also bolster Kobe's cause. More so than Chris Paul? Using Parker's logic, how many people expected L.A. to be in first place at this time of year. Granted, as of today, they are no longer tied atop the standings with New Orleans, but they have played a tougher schedule thus far. Let's just check how the standings shake out at the end of the year, okay Rob?

On the other hand, Skip chose Kevin Garnett, another valid choice. My only beef with the MVP for KG is this: everyone gives the same tired argument that 'Garnett has changed the landscape of basketball in Boston.' I have a few problems with this thought-process:

--I won't deny that Boston wouldn't have the best overall record in the league without KG, but there are much more important factors to Boston's dramatic turnaround this season:

1) Paul Pierce was injured and milked his injuries because he realized that there was no reason to bust his ass to earn the right to be swept by Detroit in the first round.

2) Boston was not as bad as their record indicated last year due to the fact that they tanked games in hopes of getting Greg Oden or Kevin Durant.

3) Um, was there not another all-star traded to the team that didn't play in Boston last year?

4) All that ra-ra, prototypical leader bull shit does not make as much difference in helping young talent as sticking the inexperienced players in a lineup with three all-star veterans. Do you think things would be drastically worse for the Celtics if KG was an introverted asshole to his teammates?

In predictable Skip fashion, Bayless used this argument for Garnett's MVP candidacy. He then made the fatal mistake that should have allowed Parker to go in for the kill. Skip said that these intangibles made up for the fact that KG likes to defer to Paul Pierce or Ray Allen in tense moments that require clutch play. Oh really, Skip, you think that emphatically cheering on your teammates from the sideline makes up for answering the call during big moments? That's why you work a morning talk show on ESPN 2.

I alluded to the fact that Parker had a golden opportunity to rip Skip a new one. And if he chose anyone other than Chris Paul he could have. As it stood, he still tried to detract Skip for having that argument: (paraphrase)"...that's why I'll take Chris Paul, he'll score or come up with the big assist when it counts."

Or come up with the big assist?

Um, Rob, I think that means that he defers the big spotlight, too. And it the timing could not have been worse for this argument, because just one night earlier, Chris Paul dished the game-winning pass to David West. Now, I think the assist is a cheap, misleading stat anyway, but never more than in this instance: getting props for a game-winning assist is like hooking a buddy up with a girl and then acting like you are the one that got laid. Now I'm not saying that Paul isn't deserving, but I can name two candidates that would not shy away from the spotlight: Kobe Bryant and LeBron James. And considering the fact that LeBron plays in an easier conference and his team's record wouldn't qualify for the playoffs in Kobe's conference, I think I'd cast my vote for the Mamba. Of course, you already knew that. Besides, if it would come down between Kobe and LeBron, I'll stick with what Kobe said about himself:

"...Stick me in the East and see what happens."

Bottomline: this is Kobe's award, they can't take it away from him again.